Public Health Interventions with Harms and Benefits: A Graphical Framework for Evaluating Tradeoffs.

BACKGROUND: Evaluations of public health interventions typically report benefits and harms aggregated over the population. However, benefits and harms are not always evenly distributed. Examining disaggregated outcomes enables decision makers to consider health benefits and harms accruing to both intended intervention recipients and others in the population. METHODS: We provide a graphical framework for categorizing and comparing public health interventions that examines the distribution of benefit and harm between and within population subgroups for a single intervention and compares distributions of harm and benefit for multiple interventions. We demonstrate the framework through a case study of a hypothetical increase in the price of meat (5%, 10%, 25%, or 50%) that, via elasticity of demand, reduces consumption and consequently reduces body mass index. We examine how inequalities in benefits and harms (measured by quality-adjusted life-years) are distributed across a population of white and black males and females. RESULTS: A 50% meat price increase would yield the greatest net benefit to the population. However, because of reduced consumption among low-weight individuals, black males would bear disproportionate harm relative to the benefit they receive. With increasing meat price, the distribution of harm relative to benefit becomes less "internal" to those receiving benefit and more "distributed" to those not receiving commensurate benefit. When we segment the population by sex only, this result does not hold. CONCLUSIONS: Disaggregating harms and benefits to understand their differential impact on subgroups can strongly affect which decision alternative is deemed optimal, as can the approach to segmenting the population. Our framework provides a useful tool for illuminating key tradeoffs relevant to harm-averse decision makers and those concerned with both equity and efficiency.

Modeling Health Benefits and Harms of Public Policy Responses to the US Opioid Epidemic.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate health outcomes of policies to mitigate the opioid epidemic. METHODS: We used dynamic compartmental modeling of US adults, in various pain, opioid use, and opioid addiction health states, to project addiction-related deaths, life years, and quality-adjusted life years from 2016 to 2025 for 11 policy responses to the opioid epidemic. RESULTS: Over 5 years, increasing naloxone availability, promoting needle exchange, expanding medication-assisted addiction treatment, and increasing psychosocial treatment increased life years and quality-adjusted life years and reduced deaths. Other policies reduced opioid prescription supply and related deaths but led some addicted prescription users to switch to heroin use, which increased heroin-related deaths. Over a longer horizon, some such policies may avert enough new addiction to outweigh the harms. No single policy is likely to substantially reduce deaths over 5 to 10 years. CONCLUSIONS: Policies focused on services for addicted people improve population health without harming any groups. Policies that reduce the prescription opioid supply may increase heroin use and reduce quality of life in the short term, but in the long term could generate positive health benefits. A portfolio of interventions will be needed for eventual mitigation.

Cost-Effectiveness of Adding Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy to an Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Among Patients With Mild Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reduces mortality and heart failure hospitalizations in patients with mild heart failure. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of adding CRT to an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (CRT-D) compared with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) alone among patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction, prolonged intraventricular conduction, and mild heart failure. DESIGN: Markov decision model. DATA SOURCES: Clinical trials, clinical registries, claims data from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention life tables. TARGET POPULATION: Patients aged 65 years or older with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 30% or less, QRS duration of 120 milliseconds or more, and New York Heart Association (NYHA) class I or II symptoms. TIME HORIZON: Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: Societal. INTERVENTION: CRT-D or ICD alone. OUTCOME MEASURES: Life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: Use of CRT-D increased life expectancy (9.8 years versus 8.8 years), QALYs (8.6 years versus 7.6 years), and costs ($286 500 versus $228 600), yielding a cost per QALY gained of $61 700. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSES: The cost-effectiveness of CRT-D was most dependent on the degree of mortality reduction: When the risk ratio for death was 0.95, the ICER increased to $119 600 per QALY. More expensive CRT-D devices, shorter CRT-D battery life, and older age also made the cost-effectiveness of CRT-D less favorable. LIMITATIONS: The estimated mortality reduction for CRT-D was largely based on a single trial. Data on patients with NYHA class I symptoms were limited. The cost-effectiveness of CRT-D in patients with NYHA class I symptoms remains uncertain. CONCLUSION: In patients with an LVEF of 30% or less, QRS duration of 120 milliseconds or more, and NYHA class II symptoms, CRT-D appears to be economically attractive relative to ICD alone when a reduction in mortality is expected. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health, University of Copenhagen, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.